Many acts of a lethal or non-lethal nature that are taken by police officials in the name of law enforcement are often questioned by the media, the public and public authorities seeking to determine whether those acts were justified or committed with wrongful intent. For example, after a police officer fires upon and kills a suspect, the officer must explain the circumstances of his actions. Sometimes, authorities investigating the actions and motives of the police officer have reservations about the course of events as averred by the officer even when the officer's acts were justified. Conversely, there are instances where a police officer's actions and motives are inappropriate, yet the self-serving statements made by a police officer about the course of events that transpired leading up to the fatal shooting are not questioned and taken for granted. Thus, there is considerable need to have objective evidence of events that occur in the moments surrounding a shooting involving a police officer.
Moreover, while some patrol vehicles carry video cameras and recording equipment to monitor and chronicle events, such as at routine traffic stops, the observation equipment fitted on these vehicles typically focuses on what transpires directly in front of the vehicle, lacking the dynamic movement and viewpoint of the law enforcement official interacting with the passengers in a vehicle or with a suspect facing the police officer. In addition, not all police officers patrol by car and many, especially in large metropolitan areas, are required to patrol on foot. Even for those officers who patrol with the assistance of a vehicle, an appreciable number of officers must nevertheless leave the immediate vicinity of their vehicles to pursue suspects on foot without video recording equipment to monitor their actions and interactions with suspects. In view of the foregoing, there is a need to have a compact video recording system for each officer on patrol which records footage during specified instances of activity—such as after a firearm is drawn or a physical altercation ensues—which records events from the viewpoint of the officer and/or the officer's firearm.
In view of the foregoing, there is a continued need to be able to capture events leading up to a shooting immediately after a firearm is unholstered to aid authorities and fact-finders who must make determinations about whether an officer's acts were appropriate or inappropriate, and if improper, to what extent. Having such a tool can also serve to save taxpayers millions of dollars by avoiding criminal investigations and public trials.
Moreover, capturing video prior to drawing a weapon, such as in the midst of a physical engagement while a weapon is still holstered, would also be extremely helpful to authorities and fact-finders who must make determinations about whether the acts of the shooter were justified. Capturing video may also assist authorities and fact-finders to determine the mental state of an officer, which is a particularly important in, for example, determining penalties and criminal charges, where punishment is based in large part on an actor's intent.